By 
Court Dismisses PIN’s Involvement in High-Profile Digital Rights Case
The High Court in Nairobi has dismissed an application by digital rights group Paradigm Initiative (PIN) to participate as amicus curiae in a major data protection case involving X Corp (formerly Twitter). The court cited concerns over perceived partisanship in the organization’s submissions.
Background of the Case
The case, brought by petitioner Felix Kibet, seeks to compel X Corp and several Kenyan government agencies—including the Attorney General, Communication Authority of Kenya, Kenya Film Classification Board, National Cohesion & Integration Commission, and Office of the Data Protection Commissioner—to:
- Delete Kenyan user accounts using aliases or unofficial names.
- Remove content deemed pornographic, lewd, hateful, or disrespectful.
- Ensure social media platforms adhere to constitutional and safety standards in Kenya.
PIN’s Application as Amicus Curiae
PIN requested to join the case as a neutral friend of the court, asserting that the petition raised critical questions about digital anonymity, privacy rights, and freedom of expression in the digital age.
The group cited its expertise in digital rights and offered to provide legal insight by addressing two key issues:
- The relationship between digital user anonymity, privacy, and freedom of expression.
- Relevant international and domestic legal frameworks.
PIN emphasized that the issues were of public interest and would benefit from comparative analysis from other legal jurisdictions.
Why the Court Rejected PIN’s Application
Despite acknowledging PIN’s expertise, the court sided with objections raised by the petitioner and the Communication Authority of Kenya, who argued that PIN’s amicus brief lacked neutrality.
Referring to Kenya’s Supreme Court guidelines in Trusted Society of Human Rights Alliance v. Mumo Matemo & Others, the judge emphasized that:
“An amicus curiae must present a brief that is neutral, legally sound, and non-partisan, without duplicating arguments already made.”
The court noted that PIN’s past publications—specifically its report “Devolved Impunity – The State of Safety and Security of Bloggers in Kenya”—suggested the organization had taken positions aligned with one side of the ongoing case.
The judge ruled that PIN’s involvement failed the neutrality test, stating:
“There is a reasonable perception of partisanship in the brief or the nature of the applicant based on its ongoing commentary on digital freedom in Kenya.”
Outcome and Implications
PIN’s application to join the case was officially dismissed, reinforcing the need for neutrality in amicus participation in legal proceedings.
The case itself continues to draw attention as it touches on digital freedom, social media regulation, and data protection, with X Corp’s operations in Kenya under scrutiny.
